单边仲裁员委任机制的道德困境及其突围——以Paulsson的提议为核心

发布时间：2018-10-09 15:34

【摘要】：为应对单边仲裁员委任机制所面临的道德困境,Paulsson提出了废除单边仲裁员委任机制,改由中立的机构委任仲裁员的主张,引起了国际仲裁界的激烈反应。一方面,单边仲裁员委任机制拉近了当事人与仲裁程序之间的距离,增强了人们对仲裁的信任,巩固了仲裁作为一种诉讼外纠纷解决模式的合法性;另一方面,此种委任机制带来了诸如仲裁员代理人化等严重的道德问题,阻碍了正义的正常输送,破坏了仲裁的正面形象。当今,仲裁的类型日趋细化,任何一刀切的解决方案,都可能适得其反。在经济领域,欲使单边仲裁员委任机制从困境中成功突围,有必要对投资仲裁与商事仲裁加以区分。对于投资仲裁,废除单边仲裁员委任机制具有可行性,但关键问题在于如何确保委任机构的中立性。对于商事仲裁,废除单边仲裁员委任机制不具有可行性,但应采取必要措施以规避或降低此种委任机制给案件带来的负面影响。与此同时,应大力倡导独任仲裁员机制的运用;在双方当事人实际地位悬殊之时,有必要引入特殊机制,以保障仲裁庭的公正性。
[Abstract]:In order to deal with the moral dilemma faced by unilateral arbitrators, Paulsson put forward the idea of abolishing the mechanism of appointing unilateral arbitrators and appointing arbitrators by neutral institutions, which has aroused the fierce reaction of the international arbitration community. On the one hand, the appointment mechanism of unilateral arbitrators has narrowed the distance between the parties and the arbitration procedure, enhanced people's trust in arbitration, and consolidated the legitimacy of arbitration as a mode of dispute settlement outside litigation; on the other hand, Such a mechanism brings serious moral problems such as arbitrators' representation, hinders the normal delivery of justice, and undermines the positive image of arbitration. Today, the types of arbitration are becoming more and more refined, and any one-size-fits-all solution can be counterproductive. In the economic field, it is necessary to distinguish investment arbitration from commercial arbitration in order to successfully break through the difficulties of unilateral arbitrators appointment mechanism. For investment arbitration, it is feasible to abolish the appointment mechanism of unilateral arbitrators, but the key problem is how to ensure the neutrality of the appointing bodies. For commercial arbitration, it is not feasible to abolish the mechanism of appointing unilateral arbitrators, but necessary measures should be taken to circumvent or reduce the negative impact of such appointment mechanism on the case. At the same time, the use of sole arbitrator mechanism should be strongly advocated, and it is necessary to introduce a special mechanism to safeguard the fairness of the arbitral tribunal when the actual status of the parties is very different.
【作者单位】：中国社会科学院法学研究所;
【分类号】：D925.7

【参考文献】